Building information modeling – A game changer for interoperability and a chance for digital preservation of architectural data?

Digital data associated with the architectural design-andconstruction process is an essential resource alongside -and even past- the lifecycle of the construction object it describes. Despite this, digital architectural data remains to be largely neglected in digital preservation research – and vice versa, digital preservation is so far neglected in the design-and-construction process. In the last 5 years, Building Information Modeling (BIM) has seen a growing adoption in the architecture and construction domains, marking a large step towards much needed interoperability. The open standard IFC (Industry Foundation Classes) is one way in which data is exchanged in BIM processes. This paper presents a first digital preservation based look at BIM processes, highlighting the history and adoption of the methods as well as the open file format standard IFC (Industry Foundation Classes) as one way to store and preserve BIM data

From Bitstreams to Heritage: Putting Digital Forensics into Practice in Collecting Institutions

This paper examines the application of digital forensics methods to materials in collecting institutions – particularly libraries, archives and museums. It discusses motivations, challenges, and emerging strategies for the use of these technologies and workflows. It is a product of the BitCurator project. The BitCurator project began on October 1, 2011, through funding from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. BitCurator is an effort to build, test, and analyze systems and software for incorporating digital forensics methods into the workflows of a variety of collecting institutions. It is led by the School of Information and Library Science (SILS) at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill and the Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities (MITH) at the University of Maryland, and involves contributors from several other institutions. Two groups of external partners are contributing to this process: a Professional Expert Panel (PEP) of individuals who are at various levels of implementing digital forensics tools and methods in their collecting institution contexts, and a Development Advisory Group (DAG) of individuals who have significant experience with software development.2 This paper is a product of phase one of BitCurator (October 1, 2011 – September 30, 2013). The second phase of the project (October 1, 2013 – September 29, 2014) continues the development of the BitCurator environment, along with expanded professional engagement and community outreach activities

The Time-Cost of Digital Forensics for Archival Collections

This study describes an experiment in which I performed a series of digital forensics tasks on different forms of digital media. The experiment was conducted in order to determine the time needed to complete these digital forensics tasks. Findings indicate that disk images and forensic reports can be generated quickly, often within seconds, for media of small storage sizes, such as floppy disks. However, for media with large amounts of storage, such as an external hard drive, a single task (generating a disk image) can take several days to complete.Master of Science in Library Scienc

Mapping Scholarly Communication Infrastructure: A Bibliographic Scan of Digital Scholarly Communication Infrastructure

This bibliography scan covers a lot of ground. In it, I have attempted to capture relevant recent literature across the whole of the digital scholarly communications infrastructure. I have used that literature to identify significant projects and then document them with descriptions and basic information. Structurally, this review has three parts. In the first, I begin with a diagram showing the way the projects reviewed fit into the research workflow; then I cover a number of topics and functional areas related to digital scholarly communication. I make no attempt to be comprehensive, especially regarding the technical literature; rather, I have tried to identify major articles and reports, particularly those addressing the library community. The second part of this review is a list of projects or programs arranged by broad functional categories. The third part lists individual projects and the organizations—both commercial and nonprofit—that support them. I have identified 206 projects. Of these, 139 are nonprofit and 67 are commercial. There are 17 organizations that support multiple projects, and six of these—Artefactual Systems, Atypon/Wiley, Clarivate Analytics, Digital Science, Elsevier, and MDPI—are commercial. The remaining 11—Center for Open Science, Collaborative Knowledge Foundation (Coko), LYRASIS/DuraSpace, Educopia Institute, Internet Archive, JISC, OCLC, OpenAIRE, Open Access Button, Our Research (formerly Impactstory), and the Public Knowledge Project—are nonprofit.Andrew W. Mellon Foundatio

Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Digital Preservation

The 12th International Conference on Digital Preservation (iPRES) was held on November 2-6, 2015 in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA. There were 327 delegates from 22 countries. The program included 12 long papers, 15 short papers, 33 posters, 3 demos, 6 workshops, 3 tutorials and 5 panels, as well as several interactive sessions and a Digital Preservation Showcase

Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Digital Preservation

The 12th International Conference on Digital Preservation (iPRES) was held on November 2-6, 2015 in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA. There were 327 delegates from 22 countries. The program included 12 long papers, 15 short papers, 33 posters, 3 demos, 6 workshops, 3 tutorials and 5 panels, as well as several interactive sessions and a Digital Preservation Showcase

EVIDENCE FOR TRUSTED DIGITAL REPOSITORY REVIEWS: AN ANALYSIS OF PERSPECTIVES

Jonathan David Crabtree: Evidence for Trusted Digital Repository Reviews: An Analysis of Perspectives(Under the direction of Dr. Helen R. Tibbo) Building trust in our research infrastructure is important for the future of the academy. Trust in research data repositories is critical as they provide the evidence for past discoveries as well as the input for future discoveries. Archives and repositories are examining their options for trustworthy review, audit, and certification as a means to build trust within their content creator and user communities. One option these institutions have is to increase and demonstrate their trustworthiness is to apply for the CoreTrustSeal. Applicants for the CoreTrustSeal are becoming more numerous and diverse, ranging general purpose repositories, preservation infrastructure providers, and domain repositories. This demand for certification and the subjective nature of decisions around levels of CORETrustSeal compliance drives this dissertation. It is a study of the review process and its veracity and consistency in determining the trustworthiness of applicant repositories. Several assumptions underlie this work. First, audits and reviews must be based on evidence supplied by the repository under scrutiny; second, and not all reviewers will approach a piece of evidence in the same fashion or give it the same weight. Third, the value and veracity of required evidence may be subject to reviewers’ diverse perspectives and diverse repository community norms. This research used a thematic qualitative analysis approach to identify similarities and differences in CoreTrustSeal reviewers’ responses during semi-structured interviews in order to better understand potential subjective differences among respondents. The participants’ non-probabilistic sample represented a balance in perspectives across three anticipated categories: administrator, archivist, and technologist. Themes converged around several key concepts. Nearly all participants felt they were performing a peer review process and working to help the repository community and the research enterprise. Reviewers were questioned about the various CoreTrustSeal application requirements and which ones they felt were the most important. No clear evidence emerged to indicate that variations in perspectives affected the subjective review of application evidence. The same categories of evidence were often selected and identified as being critical across all three categories (i.e., administrator, archivist, and technologist). Many valuable suggestions from participants were recorded and can be implemented to ensure the consistency and sustainability of this trusted repository review process. These suggestions and concepts were also very evenly distributed across the three perspectives. The balance in perspectives is potentially due to participants’ experience levels and their years of experience in various positions, holding many responsibilities, within the organizations they represented.Doctor of Philosoph

Building Capacity for Academy-Owned Publishing through the Library Publishing Coalition

Library publishing is both a growing area of interest in academic libraries and an increasingly visible subfield of scholarly publishing. This article introduces the field of library publishing—and the opportunities and values that make it unique—from the perspective of the Library Publishing Coalition (LPC). The LPC is an independent, community-led membership association of academic and research libraries and library consortia engaged in scholarly publishing, and it is the only professional association dedicated to this emerging area of librarianship. In its first five years, LPC has produced a robust set of resources to support library publishers, including the annual Library Publishing Forum, the annual Library Publishing Directory, and a variety of freely available professional development resources. It has also built a strong community of members and an extended network of affiliates. This paper presents and contextualizes these accomplishments and shares new developments and future directions for the Library Publishing Coalition

The Future(s) of Web Archive Research Across Ireland.

The central aim of this thesis is to investigate the current state of web archive research in Ireland in line with international developments. Integrating desk research, survey studies, and case studies, and using a combination of research methods, qualitative and quantitative, drawn from disciplines across the humanities and information sciences, this thesis focuses on bridging the gaps between the creation of web archives and the use of archived web materials for current and future research in an Irish context. The thesis describes web archive research to be representative of the web archiving life cycle model (Bragg & Hanna, 2013) which is inclusive of appraisal, selection, capture, storage, quality assurance, preservation and maintenance, replay/playback, access, use, and reuse. Through a synthesis of relevant literature, the thesis examines the causes for the loss of digital heritage and how this relates to Ireland and explores the challenges for participation in web archive research from creation to end use. A survey study is used to explore the challenges for the creation and use of web archives, and the overlaps, and intersections of such challenges across communities of practice within web archive research. A qualitative survey is used to provide an overview of the availability and accessibility of web archives based in Ireland, and their usefulness as resources for conducting research on Irish topics. It further discusses the influence of copyright and legal deposit legislation, or lack thereof, on their abilities to preserve digital heritage for future generations. An online survey is used to investigate awareness of, and engagement/non-engagement with, web archives as resources for research in Irish academic institutions. Overall, the findings show that due to advances in internet, web, and software technologies, there is a need for the continual evaluation of skills, tools, and methods associated with the full web archiving lifecycle. As technologies keep evolving, so too will the challenges. The findings also highlight the need for creators and users/researchers to keep moving forward as collaborators to guide the next generation of web archive research. At the same time, there is also the need for the continual evaluation of legal deposit legislation in line with the fragility of born digital heritage and the technological advances in publishing and communication technologies